Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933595AbbENQhX (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2015 12:37:23 -0400 Received: from out03.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.233]:56380 "EHLO out03.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932997AbbENQhR (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2015 12:37:17 -0400 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Al Viro Cc: Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , Christoph Hellwig , Neil Brown References: <20150505052205.GS889@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20150511180650.GA4147@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20150513222533.GA24192@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20150514033040.GF7232@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 11:32:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20150514033040.GF7232@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (Al Viro's message of "Thu, 14 May 2015 04:30:40 +0100") Message-ID: <87zj57m86f.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-XM-AID: U2FsdGVkX1+TLZmOMtJaSxQZJrrB8aSVTCs0lreK5P4= X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.3.205.90 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-Report: * -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 0.0 TVD_RCVD_IP Message was received from an IP address * 0.7 XMSubLong Long Subject * 1.5 TR_Symld_Words too many words that have symbols inside * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: No description available. * 0.8 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60% * [score: 0.5000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa05 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa05 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: **;Al Viro X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Timing: total 138 ms - load_scoreonly_sql: 0.03 (0.0%), signal_user_changed: 2.9 (2.1%), b_tie_ro: 2.1 (1.5%), parse: 0.51 (0.4%), extract_message_metadata: 9 (6.6%), get_uri_detail_list: 0.68 (0.5%), tests_pri_-1000: 4.8 (3.5%), tests_pri_-950: 1.04 (0.8%), tests_pri_-900: 0.84 (0.6%), tests_pri_-400: 16 (11.9%), check_bayes: 15 (11.2%), b_tokenize: 3.7 (2.7%), b_tok_get_all: 5 (3.8%), b_comp_prob: 1.87 (1.3%), b_tok_touch_all: 2.9 (2.1%), b_finish: 0.60 (0.4%), tests_pri_0: 97 (69.9%), tests_pri_500: 3.5 (2.5%), rewrite_mail: 0.00 (0.0%) Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHSET v3] non-recursive pathname resolution & RCU symlinks X-Spam-Flag: No X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Wed, 24 Sep 2014 11:00:52 -0600) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in01.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1185 Lines: 27 Al Viro writes: > In particular, automounts will require > discussing what exactly in the process' state is used for those - both > with autofs/NFS/AFS/CIFS folks and with Eric (what netns should be used > when we are crossing an NFSv4 referral point? Should it come from the > NFS mount we'd found the referral on, or from the process that has run > across it? There'd been a series from Ian around the interplay of > autofs with namespaces, and IIRC it stepped into similar-sounding areas; > it'll need to be looked into, etc.) Almost certainly it should be the netns of NFS mount the referral is on. Looking at processes causes all kinds of caching problems, and is only really appropriate when we are looking at something deliberate like magic symlinks (i.e. /proc/self). Automounts are the one case where I can image capturing the current netns during mounting of the filesystem could be an issue. Eric -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/